Browse
Search
Agenda - 12-14-2010 - 7f
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2010
>
Agenda - 12-14-2010 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 12-14-2010 - 7f
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/10/2010 12:30:20 PM
Creation date
12/10/2010 12:30:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/14/2010
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
7f
Document Relationships
Minutes 12-14-2010
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
3 <br />but it has to work first for the residents of Orange County. The financial model does not <br />have much value unless the associated project works for all of Orange County, not only a <br />portion of it. <br />The current transit plan may not do enough for the entire County. The majority of funds are <br />dedicated to light rail for a geographically small section of Orange County. It is hard to <br />justify something that will happen in 2022, especially in light of the recent elections and lack <br />of state and federal funding. Light rail segments do not connect as the regional route <br />system. In addition, the need for bus service hours was identified at double the amount of <br />available resources. The financial model allocates 34,000 service hours towards an Orange <br />County Bus Plan while the need is 75,000. <br />The BOCC also stated that Orange County should not abandon the long-term light rail plan. <br />A lot of work has been done and the next election could result in funding opportunities for <br />transit. However, plan phasing can be changed to respond to the realities of Orange. <br />County. <br />Action Item: Work on a plan that represents the interests of the entire County. Promote <br />geographic equity of funds distribution. <br />7. Proposed Program Schedule <br />Discussion: The BOCC was concerned with the speed of the plan; and rushed by the <br />Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) process in the interest of the regional plan. Also, <br />while there is a lot of interest in the regional planning process, not everyone is in <br />agreement at this point. According to the BOCC, Orange County needs to do <br />comprehensive planning at the County level because TRIP is a complex project and it <br />cannot be rushed. <br />Action Item: Point taken and understood. The staff will communicate this concern to TRTP <br />stakeholders. <br />8. Vehicle Registration Fee <br />Discussion: The Board requested more information on enacting a $7 vehicle registration <br />fee. <br />Answer. The enactment of the additional vehicle registration fee does not require a <br />referendum. In order to enact the fee, the BOCC would need to pass a resolution. There <br />are various conditions associated with enacting, collecting and distributing the fee. These <br />conditions are summarized in Attachment 1. <br />9. Fare System <br />Discussion: An issue of fares needs to be addressed. Chapel Hill Transit is a fare-free <br />system. Route 420, which runs between Hillsborough and Chapel Hill, is not fare free. <br />Orange County cannot have a transit system where it is fare-free for residents of Chapel <br />Hill and Carrboro, while others have to pay fares. At the same time, the County cannot <br />sustain a 100% fare-free model. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.